It’s the equivalent of a jury to a triallawyer—the black box from whichsome associates emerge with an owner-

ship interest and others do not. Besides giv-ing up the proverbial pound of flesh, whatexactly does an associate have to do tobecome a partner in a law firm these days?

Of course, there are as many answers ast h e re are law firms, and the uncertainty iscompounded by the fact that at each firm

the decision is an individualized one. Still,Docket Call’s conversations with equitypartners at three law firms in Vi rginia whow e re willing to talk about the process re v e a lsome guiding principles.

A c c o rding to Gregory J. Haley at GentryLocke Rakes & Moore in Roanoke, a forty-one lawyer firm with a two-tier track, thedecision is never just about numbers; it hasan “intangible and subjective” element to it.Good lawyering tops the list of written cri-teria, which also includes financial pro d u c-

tivity, professional involvement andreputation within the bar. “Firm cit-izenship,” or involvement withadministrative and managerialcommittees, is also important.While associates who distinguishthemselves in only one area mayreach the non-equity tier, thechemistry necessary to becomean equity partner comes from acombination of qualities thatdistinguishes good lawyersf rom indispensable ones.

Ronald R. Tweel, a prin-cipal at the fifteen-

lawyer firm ofMichie, Hamlett,Lowry, Rasmussen& Tweel inC h a r l o t t e s v i l l e ,w h e re partnerstraditionally bill

m o re hours than associates, describes thep rocess there as “not novel, but pro b a b l ym o re informal” than at larger firm s .Integrity, decorum, and furtherance of thef i rm’s reputation is important, as is being a“stand-alone lawyer”—someone who canhandle his or her practice area from A to Z.While Michie, Hamlett does not have a rigidbillable-hours re q u i rement for its associates,being financially profitable and a hardworker certainly matter. Compatibility witha limited number of co-workers is particu-larly important in a small office, where bothpartnership and initial hiring decisionsinvolve a personality component. As is trueat Gentry Locke, community service andinvolvement is fundamental.

At Hunton & Williams, whose ranks includem o re than eight hundred lawyers in seven-teen offices, partnership decisions are guid-ed first by the firm’s four core values: qual-ity, integrity, hard work, and service. A fifthconsideration, according to Harry M. “Pete”Johnson III, is strategic fit, or “economicneed,” which takes into account not only anaspiring partner’s potential to expand thef i rm’s client base but also the vibrancy ofthe relevant practice group. Serious candi-dates for equity partnerships at Hunton &Williams, which has a one-tier track, are notexpected to have substantial books of busi-ness, but they are re q u i red to be “activelyinvolved in maintaining and expanding theirpractice area,” a criterion that includesengagement with and contribution to strate-

V i r g i n i a S t a t e B a r

Vol. 22, No. 2 • Winter 2006 • Editor: Christopher E. Ga t e w o o d

DOCKET CALLNEWSLETTER Young

LawyersConference

Beyond Billables: Tipping the Balance in Your Favor at Partnership Time

Meghan M. Cloud

continued on page 7

Q As he tripped over a stack ofDocket Call Newsletters whilesearching for a client’s file, Reiss

Ikle declared, “Starting this year, I am goingto get organized!” With visions of apaperless office dancing in his head, Ikleboldly proclaimed his new off i c eprocedures: (1) scan each paper documentinto an electronic format; (2) transmit thedocument to the client by e-mail; and (3)d e s t ro y / recycle the paper document top revent disclosure of confidentialinformation. Yet, the fear of having made animprovident New Year’s resolution gnawedat Ikle even as he tried to imagine what his desk looked underthe stacks of papers. “Do I have to still keep a paper file?” “Evenif the client consents, can I destroy paper documents?” “Can Irequire that a client agree to my paperless requirements?”

ATime to break out the shredder!The Standing Committee on LegalEthics addressed the propriety of

maintaining an electronic file in Legal EthicsOpinion 1818. As the Committee noted,“[i]n determining whether an attorney ismeeting his ethical responsibilities for aparticular client, it matters not generallywhat form the documents in the file take,but instead whether all documentsnecessary for the representation are presentin the file.” Of course, certain paperdocuments must be maintained, as with, forexample, testamentary documents. But

there is no requirement contained in the Rules of ProfessionalConduct dictating file maintenance procedures, what must bekept in the client’s file or in what form.

Similarly, a lawyer is generally permitted to destroy paperdocuments after they have been converted to an electronic form a tp rovided the client consents. Notwithstanding such consent, thelawyer is often in the best position to know whether the paperdocuments may be of a benefit to the client now or at a future time.

Finally, a lawyer may condition representation on the client’sagreement to an “electronic-only” file, provided that the client’sinterests are not prejudiced.

With all of that said, whether made up of “0s and 1s,” stone tabletsor paper, the “perfect” file is one in which an attorney unfamiliarwith the matter could take it over without needing to do anythingbut review the file. It should be up to date and discretelyorganized, with sections or folders for correspondence, notes,client information, billing, engagement agreement, research, clientdocuments, etc. The subject of attorney-client communicationsbecomes ever so critical upon initiation of disciplinaryproceedings or malpractice litigation. Who said what and whendid they say it? In real estate it is all about location. In legalmalpractice cases, it is all about documentation. Write (or type)it all down.

Page 2 • Winter 2006

Legal Ethics Corner

YO UMA K Ethe

CA L L

Jeffrey Hamilton Geiger

Jeff Geiger is a Principle in the Richmond office ofSands Anderson Marks & Miller, P.C. You may reach him atjgeiger@sandsanderson.com.

Editor:Christopher E. Gatewood

Editorial Board:Jennifer Campbell, Mary Nguyen Thexton

Jeff Geiger, Michael R. Spitzer II

Board Liaison:Lesley A. Pate

Design & Production:Cheryl L. Pavkov

Docket Call welcomes contributions from members of the YLC.

Send submissions to:Christopher E. Gatewood

Hirschler Fleischer PC 701 East Byrd Street

P.O. Box 500 Richmond, Virginia 23218-0500

cgatewood@hf-law.com (804) 771-9595

Fax (804) 644-0957

Docket CallA quarterly publication of the Young Lawyers

Conference of the Virginia State Bar.

Winter 2006 • Page 3

In my mission to strengthen our community and better our p rofession, I often find inspiration in the history books. Join me

in revisiting a story that taught a nation that human dignity is a right,re g a rdless of one’s station in life; and that right must beacknowledged and re s p e c t e d .

The death of Rosa Parks at age 92 reminded me that dignifieddefiance has the power to change laws, lives and nations. Fifty yearsago, this American icon re f e r red to by many as the “Mother of theAmerican Civil Rights Movement,” led the challenge to the South’sJim Crow laws and Montgomery Alabama’s segregated bus seatingpolicy. Mrs. Parks began a movement that would bring intern a t i o n a lattention to the unjust practices of the segregated South. By re f u s i n gto relinquish her seat to a white passenger, this ordinary citizen,a rmed with human dignity and moral fortitude, changed the destinyof millions. I include myself in that number. All across this country,civic and community centers, schools and even highways are namedin her honor.

On Thursday, December 1, 1955, Mrs. Parks, a forty-two-year- o l ds e a m s t ress for the Fair Department Store boarded the ClevelandAvenue bus in Montgomery. For African-Americans, who made upt w o - t h i rds of the bus riders, riding the bus in 1955 segre g a t e dMontgomery was no easy task. To ride, they had to step onto thebus, pay the driver, exit the bus and walk to the back door tore b o a rd. If they were fortunate, they would find an empty seat in the“ c o l o red section” and would complete their ride. However, pursuantto Alabama law, when asked, African-Americans were re q u i red togive up their seats to white patrons, and had to move to the back ofthe bus. They were not allowed to sit across the aisle from whites.

On that famous Thursday, Mrs. Parks took her seat in the “colore dsection.” As the bus made its stops, it became crowded. Mrs. Parkswas ord e red to give up her seat to a white passenger. She re f u s e d .Some historians have written that her feet ached and she was tire d .Others have written that her act was planned by the NAACP.

H o w e v e r, by her own testimony, Mrs. Parks stated that she was “nom o re tired than usual” and that she did not plan her arrest. “I did notget on the bus to get arrested. I got on the bus to go home.”

Mrs. Parks stated that she was tired of segregation, Jim Crow lawsand the racist treatment she and other African-Americans re c e i v e devery day of their lives. In her book, Quiet Stre n g t h, Mrs. Parksw rote, “Our mistreatment was just not right, and I was tired of it. Ikept thinking about my mother and my grandparents, and hows t rong they were. I knew there was a possibility of being mistre a t e d ,but an opportunity was being given to me to do what I had askedof others.”

C l i ff o rd Durr, a white attorney whose wife had hired Mrs. Parks as as e a m s t ress, posted bail for her release after her arrest. The NAACPhad searched long and hard for an ideal plaintiff for a case tochallenge the constitutionality of Montgomery’s segregation laws andexpose the injustice of segregated public transportation. Thatevening, they lobbied Mrs. Parks, and she agreed to be the face forthe NAACP’s case.

The rest of the story is American history: her trial, a 381-dayMontgomery bus boycott, the establishment of the MontgomeryI m p rovement Association with Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. as itsp resident, and the Supreme Court’s ruling in November 1956, findingthat segregation on public transportation was unconstitutional.

Today we can all learn from the example of Rosa Parks. She wast i red of being humiliated; tired of having to adapt to unjust rulescodified into unjust laws. By sitting, Rosa Parks stood up forAfrican-Americans and challenged all laws that treated them assomething less than human beings. In her simple act of dignifieddefiance, Rosa Parks taught us: each of us has the power within usto change our communities, our families, and maybe even ournation through simple acts of dignified defiance. Do your part in2006 to pass on this legacy.

Message from the Pre s i d e n tJimmy F. Robinson, Jr.

How Dignified Defiance Can Change A Nation:A Tribute to Rosa Parks, An American Icon

Each person must live their life as a model for others. —Rosa Parks

Page 4 • Winter 2006

T he General Assembly last year approved the merger oflaw and equity in Vi rg i n i a . The Vi rginia Supreme Court’snew rules went into effect on January 1. The Old Rules

of the Supreme Court of Vi rginia were divided into Part 2 (Equity)and Part 3 (Law). The New Rules now abolish Part 2 and have aunified Part 3 for both law and equity.

Most of the changes to the Rules are for nomenclature purposesonly and do not affect anything substantive. T h e re are a fewsubstantive changes in the Rules. For example, Rule 3:8 re p l a c e sold 3:5 relating to the filing of defensive pleas and motions aswell as grounds of defense (now re f e r red to as “answers” in allc a s e s ) . T h e re is a new statement which did not appear in the oldrule as follows: “A demurre r, plea, motion to dismiss, and motionfor bill of particulars shall each be deemed a pleading inresponse for the count or counts addressed there i n . ” This issignificant in two re s p e c t s . By listing particular defensive pleas asbeing “deemed a pleading in response,” it is unclear whetherother motions, such as motions craving oyer, motion to quash,motion to stay, or motion to transfer are deemed re s p o n s i v ep l e a d i n g s . Caselaw will certainly iron out these questions in themonths to come, but if such motions are not deemed re s p o n s i v e ,a party may face a motion for default judgment for not filing aresponsive pleading within 21 days of service of the Complaint.To be cautious, it is probably wise to file an Answer along withanother motion to prevent your client from being in default.

Rule 3:8 contains a significant change in pro c e d u re for demurre r s .The rule states directly that if you are demurring or challenging

in some other defensive filing less than all counts of theComplaint, you must file an Answer at to all other counts nota d d ressed in your demurre r, plea or motion. P reviously, it wasfairly common to see a party demur to a subset of the counts inthe Motion for Judgment or Bill of Complaint, and, only when thed e m u r rer was ruled upon, to file a responsive pleading. U n d e rthe new rules, if a party demurs to fewer than all counts of theComplaint, an Answer must also be filed to the counts notd e m u r red to within 21 days of service of the Complaint.

The other significant rule change is Rule 3:21 which deals withjury trials by right. T h e re was not a comparable pro v i s i o nunder the old rules. Under the new rule, you must file andserve a demand for a jury within 10 days of service of the “lastpleading directed to the issue” or the constitutional right to ajury trial is waived as per the Federal Rules of Civil Pro c e d u re .Pursuant to the Federal Rules, the last pleading directed to theissue has been held to be the Answer. To preserve your rightto a jury trial, I suggest that a demand for a jury trial becontained in the Complaint.

Hopefully, these tips on the new rules will prevent your clientsf rom being the test cases under the new rules!

See You in CourtNews and Practice Tips for Virginia Litigators

Be Careful Not to Become a Test Case Under the New Rules of CourtMichael R. Spitzer II

Mike Spitzer is a litigation associate at HirschlerF l e i s c h e r, P.C. in Richmond. He can be reached atm s p i t z e r @ h f - l a w . c o m .

The Special Committee on Access to Legal Services ofthe Virginia State Bar and the Miller Center of

Public Affairs at the University of Virginia inviteyou to mark your calendar for the

Annual VSB Pro Bono & Access to Justice

ConferenceWednesday, April 26, 2006

Miller Center of Public Affairs - Charlottesville, VAlook for updates online at www.vsb.org/probono

Vi rginia State Bar P rofessionalism Course

Upcoming course dates:MA R C H 2, 2006—CH A R L O T T E S V I L L E

MAY 4, 2006—CH E S A P E A K E

JU LY 27, 2006—MCLE A N

August 24, 2006—RO A N O K E

for additional dates and a registration form:

www.vsb.org/membership/professionalism.pdf

Winter 2006 • Page 5

T he Immigrant Outreach Committee is a relatively newcommittee of the Young Lawyer’s Conference. Thisyear the committee will focus its efforts on pro v i d i n g

education to the legal community in order to improve thequality of re p resentation available to immigrants. Thecommittee will be holding the first annual Model HearingP rogram in March, in partnership with the Executive Office ofImmigration Review (EOIR).

The Model Hearing Program was developed by the Pro BonoP rogram of the EOIR to improve advocacy before the immigrationcourts and to train lawyers who wish to provide pro bonore p resentation. The program is also designed to provide basicimmigration law to practitioners so that they can more fullyunderstand the consequences of their actions on their clients’immigration status.

The Model Hearing Program consists of two parts. The first halfof the program is a two-hour CLE covering the basics ofimmigration law and providing ‘‘hands-on” immigration courttraining. The CLE will emphasize practice, pro c e d u re andadvocacy skills. The second half of the program is a model

hearing which consists of a small-scale ‘‘mock” immigration trial,p resented by a volunteer immigration judge.

The CLE will be held at the George Mason University School of LawCampus in Arlington, and the mock trial will be held at theImmigration Court in Arlington. It is free of charge, and participantswill receive training materials and CLE credit, so long as they committo take one pro case in the following twelve months.

The Immigration Outreach Committee believes this is an excellentopportunity for attorneys to improve their knowledge ofimmigration matters. This program has already been held withg reat success in cities such as San Diego, Dallas, New Yo r k ,Cleveland, Newark and Seattle. We anticipate similar success herein Vi rg i n i a .

The program will take place in March 2006. If you are interested inparticipating or assisting with the program, please contact committeechair Sarah Louppe Petcher at s a r a h l o u p p e @ y a h o o . c o m .

Immigrant Outreach Committee Seeks to Educate AttorneysSarah Louppe Petcher

Sarah Louppe Petcher is an associate at Colten,Cummins, Watson & Vincent P.C. in Fairfax.

H ave you ever wondered how you became interested inthe practice of law? Maybe one of your parents was ana t t o rney or maybe you attended a career fair in high

school or college? The Oliver Hill/Samuel Tucker Pre - L a wInstitute (“Institute”), sponsored in part by the Millenium DiversityInitiative, is just one avenue that helps to expose minority highschool students to the practice of law. One of the goals of theInstitute is to provide an opportunity for students to learn aboutthe varied areas of attorney expertise and practice.

Participants in the Institute spend a week on the campus ofthe University of Richmond. Their daily schedule is full of classes,seminars and practitioner panels. From Civil Pro c e d u re andCriminal Law to LSAT’s and Financial Planning, students attendmock law school classes and learn exactly what it takes to movef rom high school to college and law school. One of the highlightsof the week is a visit to the United States Court of Appeals for theFourth Circuit. Annually, Judge Roger Gregory meets with

students to share his personal story and provides practicalapplications of the law to every day life.

Not only do participants focus on academics – they also havea little fun. The Institute schedule is full of social activitiesdesigned to relieve the stress of the academic re q u i rements of theweek. Students spend time with each other and practicinga t t o rneys in relaxed environments while bowling, attending aRichmond Braves baseball game and participating in a true test ofan attorney’s competitive nature – Laser Tag.

The week culminates in an exciting and challenging event, atrial complete with opening statements, direct examination, cro s sexamination and closing arguments. As “attorneys,” the studentsa re charged with witness preparation and introduction ofevidence. It is no small feat to see high school studentsaccomplish what took many of us nine months to accomplish asfirst year law school students.

A Legacy of LearningJacqueline McClenney

continued on page 7

The Wills for Heroes program successfully served three sepa-rate communities across the Commonwealth in 2005. Thanksin large part to the tremendous efforts of local volunteers, the

p rogram served the Wi l l i a m s b u rg community in May and June,Cumberland in August and September, and Danville in November.

The Vi rginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference, in conjunctionwith the Vi rginia Bar Association Young Lawyers Division, sponsorsthe Wills for Heroes program. Created in the wake of theSeptember 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the program offers free wills,durable powers of attorney and advance medical directives to “FirstResponders” – firefighters, police, sheriff’s deputies and other emer-gency personnel. As part of the program, volunteer attorn e y sattend a free CLE seminar to learn about the program and the com-puter software that generates the estate planning documents. Priorto receiving the documents, first responders attend a presentation toeducate them about the benefits of estate planning and the docu-ments the program offers them.

The program’s Wi l l i a m s b u rg organizers were VSB YLC 2005 9thC i rcuit Representative Laura Rugless of Heikes & Rugless, P.C. andtrust and estate attorney Helena Mock of Jones, Blechman, Woltz &Kelly, P.C. The Danville effort was organized by VSB YLC 22ndC i rcuit Representative Trevor Moe, trust and estate attorney HarrySakellaris, and Hunter Byrnes, all of Clement & Wheatley, P.C. ErinWhaley, of Troutman Sanders LLP, who is the program's new com-mittee chair and VSB YLC 10th Circuit Representative, planned andled the successful effort in Cumberland, Vi rg i n i a .

2006 also promises to be a successful and busy year for the Wills forH e roes program. After months of planning, the program is curre n t-ly taking place in Norfolk. As one of the Commonwealth’s larg e rcities, Norfolk is a substantial undertaking. Tricia Batson, local vol-unteer coordinator and immediate past chair of the Young LawyersSection of the Norfolk Portsmouth Bar Association, reports that thevolunteer response in Norfolk has been tremendous. On January 9,2006, over 50 attorney volunteers attended the CLE, which was ledby trust and estate attorneys Leigh Anne Bolling of Midgett & Pre t iPC and Amy Pesesky of Williams Mullen. Attorney volunteers havea l ready signed up for sessions with Norfolk’s first responders, whicha re scheduled to take place through March 2006.

The success of Wills for Heroes program relies on the efforts of thea t t o rney volunteers, who have given up their weekends andevenings to provide this service to our local first responders. This isan ongoing program that will continue to call on the time and tal-ents of members of the YLC. For more information and to getinvolved with the Wills for Heroes program in your area, contactCarson Sullivan at carsonsullivan@paulhastings.com or Erin Whaleyat Erin.Whaley@troutmansanders.com.

Page 6 • Winter 2006

Wills for Heroes: Successfully Serving Communities in 2005and Looking Forward to 2006

Carson Sullivan

Carson Sullivan is an associate at Paul Hastings inWashington, D.C. in the firm’s employment law section.

Wi l l i a m s b u rg volunteers attended the Wills for Heroes CLE, led by Helena Mock.After attending the CLE, volunteer attorneys helped provide free wills and otherestate planning documents to local First Responders.

The 2005 Wills for Heroes program in Wi l l i a m s b u rg was organized by LauraRugless of Heikes & Rugless, P.C. (left) and trust and estate attorney Helena Mock ofJones, Blechman, Woltz & Kelly, P.C. (right). Rugless was the 2005 YLC Circ u i tR e p resentative for the 9th Circ u i t .

Winter 2006 • Page 7

V I R G I N I A S T A T E B A RY O U N G L A W Y E R S C O N F E R E N C E

F I F T H A N N U A L

Professional Development ConferenceMarch 17 and 18, 2006

A 6.0 hour CLE (pending) seminar for younger lawyers and a great opportunity to network statewide.

$125University of Virginia Darden School, Charlottesville

Save the date!

Registration form available atwww.vayounglawyers.org

VSB 68TH ANNUAL MEETING • JUNE 15–18VI R G I N I A BE A C H • The Cavalier Hotel and the Holiday Inn SunspreeSAV E T H E DAT E

gic planning. Considerations vary not only with the individual butalso with the practice group; a team that is sustained by one or twol a rge clients will obviously weigh factors diff e rently from one with am o re varied client base. Timing can also vary: although associatesbecome eligible to join Hunton & Williams’s equity ranks eight yearsout of law school, Johnson noted that there is no point at which thepossibility of partnership has been fore c l o s e d .

While the lack of precise, objective guidelines might be frustratingto those of us on this side of the fence, it may be worth keeping inmind that we are, after all, talking about partnerships. Existing part-ners might be forgiven for wanting to preserve a bit of flexibilitywhen it comes to deciding whether or not to invite a particularassociate into the ownership and shared control of a law firm. Theissue, of course, is not just the associate’s future, but also the firm ’ s .A c c o rding to Pete Johnson, the gravity of the situation is not lost onpartners, whose decision-making process spans many months eachyear and includes its share of agonizing.

Feeling powerless? Don’t. The best piece of advice for ambitiousyoung lawyers may have come from Greg Haley, who notes that“associates who succeed think like owners”—by treating cases astheir own, being ever-cognizant of the firm’s reputation, and seek-ing out chances to create favorable exposure and maximize businessopportunity. If your aspirations include making partner, think andact like an owner. It will increase your chances of becoming one.

Meghan M. Cloud is a litigation associate with McGuireWoods LLP in the firm’s Charlottesville offi c e .

Beyond Billables, continued from page 1

So, maybe you do not recall how you first became intere s t e din the practice of law. What you can now be certain of is howYOU can make a mark in the life of a young person—YOU canbe a part of the legacy of learning. YOU, too, can honor thelegacy and life-work of Oliver Hill and Samuel Tucker byvolunteering with the Institute.

The 2006 Oliver Hill/Samuel Tucker Pre-Law Institute istentatively scheduled for July 23-28, 2006 at the University ofRichmond School of Law, pending receipt of funding. If you arei n t e rested in volunteering with the Institute, please contactJacqueline McClenney at (804) 916-7135 orjacqueline.mcclenney@leclairryan.com

A Legacy of Learning, continued from page 5

Jacqueline S. McClenney is is an associate with theGovernment Relations and Regulated Industries Group ofLeClair Ryan.

YLC Board ElectionsAt its Annual Meeting on June 16, 2006, theVi rginia State Bar Young Lawyers Confere n c ewill be electing members to the Board ofG o v e rnors in the following districts:

2n d, 5t h, 6t h, 7t h, 8t h, 9t h, 10t h, and four at-large positions.

All nominations are due on May 1, 2006 and should be sent to:

Savalle C. SimsA rent Fox PLLC1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20036-5339202.857.6395 fax • sims.savalle@are n t f o x . c o m

Any active (in good standing) member of the VSB under theage of 36 or in their first three years of practice may serve onthe YLC Board .

P R E S O RT E DFIRST CLASS

U.S. POSTAGE PA I DRICHMOND, VAPERMIT NO. 709

DOCKET CALLVi rginia State Bar Young Lawyers Confere n c e

707 East Main Street, Suite 1500Richmond, VA 23219-2800

Beyond Billables ..................................................page 1

Legal Ethics Corner ............................................. page 2

President’s Message .............................................page 3

See You in Court ................................................. page 4

Immigrant Outreach ............................................ page 5

A Legacy of Learning .......................................... page 5

Wills for Heroes .................................................. page 6

Address Change?If you have moved or changed your address, please see the

VSB Membership Department’s page on the Web for an addressupdate form at www.vsb.org/membership/.

Docket CallWinter 2006, Contents

R. ED W I N BU R N E T T E JR. YO U N G LAW Y E R O F T H E YE A R AWA R D

Seeking NominationsThe Vi rginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference is seeking nominations forthe R. Edwin Burn e t t e J r. Young Lawyer of the Year Aw a rd .

This award honors an outstanding young Vi rginia lawyer who hasdemonstrated dedicated serv i c e to the YLC, the profession and the community.

The nomination deadline is May 1, 2006. Letters of nominations and anys u p p o rting materials should be sent to:

Savalle C. Sims, Arent Fox PLLC, 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20036-5339

(202) 857-6000; Fax: (202) 857-6395; simss@are n t f o x . c o m